💬 TheCharlatan commented on pull request "kernel: Separate UTXO set access from validation functions":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32317#discussion_r2053511978)
Added a commit.

💬 ajtowns commented on pull request "fuzz: enable running fuzz test cases in Debug mode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32113#issuecomment-2820499887)
Renamed to `G_FUZZING_BUILD`. Added ryanofsky's docs. Left the constexpr optimisations in.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "miner: timelock the coinbase to the mined block's height":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32155#discussion_r2053579424)
It affects any miner that uses the Mining interface, because `createNewBlock` returns a `BlockTemplate` which includes a `getBlock()` method which returns a `CBlock` that contains the coinbase transaction.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "doc: warn that CheckBlock() underestimates sigops":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31624#discussion_r2053597806)
The original context was that a miner created an invalid block with too many sigops. I wanted to make sure that it was because they made an invalid patch, and not because our code is broken. I wrote this comment while trying to understand the behaviour better.

It may be a good idea to actually improve the check here, since it's relied on by `getblocktemplate` in proposal mode and by #31981. But that would be another PR imo.

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "Add checkBlock() to Mining interface":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31981#issuecomment-2820550469)
Note to self, figure out if the sigops check needs to be fixed here or in another PR: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31624/files#r2053597806

💬 Sjors commented on pull request "rpc: add optional blockhash to waitfornewblock, unhide wait methods in help":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30635#discussion_r2053618061)
I replaced the `/**`.

I dropped the warmup comment, but will keep the `CHECK_NONFATAL`. If the RPC starts listening before `ActiveChain().Tip()` is set, then `getTip()` returns nothing. I'm not sure if that can ever happen. `SetRPCWarmupFinished()` is called as step 13 in `init.cpp` with a somewhat ominous comment above it.

⚠️ fanquake opened an issue: "ci: failure in interface_usdt_coinselection.py"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32322)
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/actions/runs/14579386142/job/40892496346#step:6:5102:
```bash
122/318 - interface_usdt_coinselection.py failed, Duration: 16 s

stdout:
2025-04-21T19:37:36.056000Z TestFramework (INFO): PRNG seed is: 4088013170701346751
2025-04-21T19:37:36.066000Z TestFramework (INFO): Initializing test directory /home/runner/work/_temp/ci/scratch/test_runner/test_runner_₿_🏃_20250421_192058/interface_usdt_coinselection_192
2025-04-21T19:37:38.378000Z TestFramework (INFO): hoo
...

💬 fanquake commented on issue "ci: failure in interface_usdt_coinselection.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32322#issuecomment-2820637063)
cc @0xB10C

💬 maflcko commented on issue "ci: failure in interface_usdt_coinselection.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32322#issuecomment-2820656309)
Probably an erroneous kernel that was pushed to GHA by microsoft? Seems fixed by now

💬 maflcko commented on pull request "fuzz: enable running fuzz test cases in Debug mode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32113#issuecomment-2820675009)
re-ACK 3669ecd4ccd8e7a1e2b1a9dcbe708c51c78e4d6c 🏉

<details><summary>Show signature</summary>

Signature:

```
untrusted comment: signature from minisign secret key on empty file; verify via: minisign -Vm "${path_to_any_empty_file}" -P RWTRmVTMeKV5noAMqVlsMugDDCyyTSbA3Re5AkUrhvLVln0tSaFWglOw -x "${path_to_this_whole_four_line_signature_blob}"
RUTRmVTMeKV5npGrKx1nqXCw5zeVHdtdYURB/KlyA/LMFgpNCs+SkW9a8N95d+U4AP1RJMi+krxU1A3Yux4bpwZNLvVBKy0wLgM=
trusted comment: re-ACK 3669ecd4ccd8e7a1e2b1
...

💬 hebasto commented on issue "gui: translation spam?":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32295#issuecomment-2820714655)
I'm on it.

💬 marcofleon commented on pull request "fuzz: enable running fuzz test cases in Debug mode":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32113#issuecomment-2820825720)
re ACK 3669ecd4ccd8e7a1e2b1a9dcbe708c51c78e4d6c

💬 hebasto commented on issue "PIE+LTO causes Bitcoin-Qt to segfault at startup":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/867#issuecomment-2820828813)
1. It seems reasonable to move this issue to the [main](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues) repository to increase its visibility to the build system developers.

2. I can't reproduce the issue on Ubuntu 24.10 using GCC 14.2.0:
```
$ rm -rf build && cmake -B build -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS=-flto -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS=-flto -DBUILD_GUI=ON
$ cmake --build build -t bitcoin-qt
$ ./build/bin/bitcoin-qt
```

This suggests the issue may be specific to the default compiler options. If so, please consider updat
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "tests: Improve stderr validation in test_runner.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32183#discussion_r2053824868)
This is intended to handle multi-config generator, which create per-config subdirectories:
```
$ cmake -B build-mc -G "Ninja Multi-Config"
$ cmake --build build-mc
$ ctest --test-dir build-mc -R util_test_runner
```

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "cmake: Improve robustness and usability":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/31233#discussion_r2053826793)
Answered in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32183#discussion_r2053824868.

👍 TheCharlatan approved a pull request: "rpc: add optional blockhash to waitfornewblock, unhide wait methods in help"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30635#pullrequestreview-2783648578)
Re-ACK c6e2c31c55123cc97b4400bcbf3c37a39b067a22

💬 thesamesam commented on issue "PIE+LTO causes Bitcoin-Qt to segfault at startup":
(https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/issues/867#issuecomment-2820894205)
Ubuntu builds their Qt with "reduce relocations" disabled, so it doesn't hit this (see https://bugs.gentoo.org/933110#c5).

The root cause is a mix between Qt, CMake, and the fact there's no way for the toolchain to communicate a problem. CMake doesn't seem particularly interested in fixing it given https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/issues/15570#note_477736. Qt says that the right thing to do is to honour their own recommendation (naturally).

I spent a significant amount of time investig
...

⚠️ fanquake opened an issue: "build: CMake caching failing PIE check"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/32323)
Similar to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31942#issuecomment-2703801270, CMake caches the check failure, which leaves the user in a broken state (unless they nuke the build dir):
```bash
cmake -B build -DAPPEND_CXXFLAGS="-ftrivial-auto-var-init"
-- The CXX compiler identification is GNU 14.2.0
-- Detecting CXX compiler ABI info
-- Detecting CXX compiler ABI info - done
-- Check for working CXX compiler: /usr/bin/c++ - skipped
-- Detecting CXX compile features
-- Detecting CXX compile
...

📝 hebasto opened a pull request: "test: Treat executable paths in tests consistently"
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32324)
When using multi-config CMake generators, executable paths include per-config subdirectories, which require special handling in tests. Using dedicated environment variables to specify executable paths works well in such scenarios. However, the `util_test_runner` test sets these variables for the `util/test_runner.py` script unconditionally, which diverges from the approach used when running `functional/test_runner.py`.

This change makes the usage of the aforementioned environment variables un
...

💬 hebasto commented on pull request "tests: Improve stderr validation in test_runner.py":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32183#discussion_r2053861553)
@maflcko

I believe https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/32324 should address your concerns.